*BSD News Article 19043


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.development:972 comp.os.coherent:10177 comp.os.msdos.programmer:23874 comp.os.os2.programmer.porting:186 comp.unix.bsd:12337 comp.unix.programmer:10793
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development,comp.os.coherent,comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer.porting,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.programmer
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!pipex!warwick!nott-cs!nyquist!nlc
From: nlc@trellis.cs.nott.ac.uk (Neil L Cook)
Subject: Re: Need advice: Which OS to port to?
Message-ID: <1993Jul30.091217.9321@cs.nott.ac.uk>
Sender: news@cs.nott.ac.uk
Nntp-Posting-Host: trellis
Reply-To: nlc@cs.nott.ac.uk
Organization: Communications Research Group
References:  <233o0b$sr9@access.digex.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 93 09:12:17 GMT
Lines: 32

In article <233o0b$sr9@access.digex.net>, kbennett@access.digex.net (Keith R. Bennett) writes:
|> 1) stay with DOS, but use DOS extender (no multitasking here)
|> 2) OS/2
|> 3) Unix/Xenix
|> 4) Coherent
|> 5) QNX
|> 
|> 
|> We need to run in DOS graphics mode, and need to be able to take over
|> the screen completely.  The user interface is our own; we cannot use
|> any OS-native user interface conventions.

Hmm, I can only see this happening in an OS which has DOS emulation.
Then your code will still be running under DOS and there would seem to
be little point in making the change. If you were prepared to put a
little work into making the UI separable from the engine, (I mean this
is in C++ right?), then rewriting the interface class should be a
doddle... :-)

|> It would be nice if there were built-in garbage collection to close
|> up gaps in the heap.  The application will be running continuously
|> for days/months at a time.  Although we have made great efforts to
|> avoid using the heap, some allocations remain.

Well, this is only a consideration in brain-damaged OS's like DOS and
MacOS. You don't worry about this in UNIX for example.

I would suggest that, unless you want to do a bit of work and modify
your application, you stick with DOS(+). Either that or run it in a DOS
emulator under OS/2 or a UNIX system.

Neil.